Date   

Re: 3D printing (Was: New early P&R steel.....)

Ryan Mendell
 

Ok here goes.

1. Yes, Parts can come out different sizes if printed along its length or across its length.

2. Out of the printer I can say it will hold +\- 0.002” over an inch, but it can shrink or bend when in the wax removal oven.  It will shrink different percentages depending on the print orientation in my experience. It can also vary between bottles of material. I think Shapeways has taken into account the other variables in their spec.  3D Systems is giving best case scenario, remember they are trying to sell printers.  Shapeways or anyone else is going to have the same issues if trying to print so many of the same part, especially if they are using more than one printer to print your order.  Its very possible some parts were printed along the length and some across it.

3.  As for making masters for resin, I never have to print more than two of a part(two sides or two ends for example) and I print them both at the same time in the same orientation. If the size is a bit off, no big deal as long as they are the same.
 
 I am a bit perplexed why you are printing so many of the same part, it would be much more cost effective to make a mold of each part you need and cast the rest.  Prints are expensive compared to casting.

  As for using 3D prints for low volume production, a bit too expensive at this point. A 2 kg bottle of material for the Projets costs almost a thousands bucks. Support material is about half that.  They also purge a lot of material  to keep the jets that aren’t used in each pass from clogging up.  Casting Resin is way cheaper.  

 I know some others are printing full body cars on printers like the Form2, for me the parts show too many layer or support effects.  Too each there own.

4.  The Form printers and others like it make very nice parts like figures and such. But as Dennis pointed out they are made like paper printers, I don’t see the accuracy coming out of these.   I have printed an End I have designed on more than 20 different printers now including the Form2.  They were all unusable, except for the parts from the Projets or the Multijet printers from Stratasys like the Connex series. 

In fact the master pattern I use for one of my kits uses this End and has three pairs on it. Two sets were printed on the Strataysys Connex and the other set on the Projet, I challenge anyone to figure out which came from what printer.

The ends from all the other cheaper consumer level printers come out with massive warps or poor resolution.

  The Form3 has peeked my interest but I am not buying one until I can test print the same End on it and see if it comes out warped or not and with the same quality as the jet style printers. These style printers are challenged by thin flat parts like ends and doors IMHO,  I really hope it’s a break through though.

Printing an end with an easily removed box on the back may solve the warping issues, something to try out as it may help resist the peel effects when the head raises.

Also I don’t work in the 3D printing industry per se, I manage a Machine shop at a University where we make specialized devices for research.  We have every tool under the sun and a bunch of 3D printers.  I’ve worked with almost every type of 3D printer over the last fifteen years. The best part though is how every company is trying to sell us there latest 3D printer,  I get them to test print my same End as a comparison to our other printers.😜  It makes it easy for me to compare them and I get to do some side research to see if it’s worth it for me to buy one personally.  I haven’t bought one yet.

Ryan


On Dec 23, 2019, at 4:37 PM, dalemuir2@... wrote:



Hi Ryan,

It's great to hear from a subject matter expert that actually works in this industry . Thank you for your excellent explanation.

 

For reference, here is a quote from both Projet 3600 and Projet 5500 specs:

Accuracy (typical) ±0.001-0.002 inch per inch (0.025-0.05 mm per 25.4 mm) of part dimension. Accuracy may vary depending on build parameters, part geometry and size, part orientation, and post-processing.

End quote

That means accuracy should be within approximately 0.1% to 0.2%

For reference, Shapeways specification for Fine Detail Plastic is way looser: ±0.3- 0.7 mm for every 100 mm

 

Would you please answer these questions?

 

1.       Is part orientation a factor in process control?

2.       I've had multiple copies of the same 205mm long model made in Smoothest Fine Detail Plastic vary in length -0.5mm to about -1.0mm, even from the same order. Yet, about 60% of the same part are the correct length. I've been stonewalled by Shapeways' Quality Control person , saying that the lengths are within specification. So the question to you is "Are these dimensional inconsistencies a limitation of the machine, or could Shapeways do something better?"

3.       If I interpret the specs correctly, my 205mm long part should be within ±0.2mm to ±0.4mm of 205mm, or between 204.6mm and 205.4mm. A difference of 0.8mm would mean the parts might not fit another printed part or a part from another source. 0.8mm is almost 3 inches in HO scale. My question then is "How can such 3D parts be used to create masters or molds?" "How can 3D printed parts be used for low volume parts instead of injection molded parts?"

4.       Finally, as you probably know, Formlabs is coming out with the Form 3L late next year. I didn't see any specification on accuracy for the Form3 on their web site. In your opinion, would a  Low Force Stereolithography (LFS) machine like the Form3 give more accuracy?

 

Thank you for taking the time to answer these questions. My hope was to be able to create low volume kits for items I need and share these with others. However, I can't do that with large parts due to the accuracy limitations with large parts, such as a passenger car or bridge girder.

 

Dale Muir

Geneva, IL

 

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Ryan Mendell
Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2019 12:26 PM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] 3D printing (Was: New early P&R steel.....)

 

I would like to offer to shed some light on the Jet printing Process, as it seams there is a genuine interest by this group to further understand the process.  At work I manage and run both a 3D Systems Projet 3600 and Projet 5500 printers.  These are what are know as ‘Polyjet' or ‘Multijet' 3d printers and is what Shapeways uses for their Fine Detail processes.  The 3600 has a build area of about 8" x 12” inches and the 5500 16” x 20”. 

 

The print head on these printers has two rows of jets, one for the model or body material as Tom called it and another for the wax or support material.  The print head on the Projet 5500 has 2400 jets across a width of 8”.  This works out to 300DPI.  To achieve higher resolution the print head shifts sideways by a pixel width and makes two passes for each layer to achieve 600DPI.  For 750DPI it makes three passes for each layer and shifts both left and right of the first pass by 0.66 of a pixel width.  I may have the math wrong for 750 DPI but I hope you get the idea.

 

After each layer is deposited at what ever DPI selected, the head has a spinning roller that pushes or forces the deposited resin down into the previous layer.  Behind the roller is a knife blade that slices the resin layer to the choose layer thickness. The final step is the head has a UV light that turns on and cures the layer.  The 5500 head is only half the width of the build plate and must make a shift half the build plate width to print the entire 16” width.  The 3600 print head is the full width of the build plate.  

 

Part print orientation is critical to get better printed parts. The head moves in the x axis.  Thus if you want to orient your part along or across the print direction you need to pick which side of your part aligns with the X axis in your CAD file.  I always design models as flat kits with the show side facing up on the build plate so no wax is used to support the critical faces of the part.  

 

To answer an earlier question as to the rigidity of these machines.  They are built like machine tools.  They have heavy frames, use servo motors(not stepper motors) and linear guide way bearings just like the CNC mills we have at work also.  The Projet 5500 weighs in at 3000lbs. 

 

As far as process control.  There really isn’t any.  You load the part into the software, Orient it the way you want and press the print button.  The only human involvement is the support removal.  The wax is melted off in an oven, and then the last of it is removed in an ultrasonic cleaner.  The big issue is warpage caused when the part is in the oven.  I no longer remove wax for model parts in the oven.  I remove it with a hobby knife and a dissolve the last of it with alcohol.  Thus avoiding warpage.  Unfortunately Shapways doesn’t offer manual removal of support material.  If your part is not symmetrical, or has thin sections and thick sections there is a good chance it will warp in the support removal oven.  You end up with bent parts or dimensional issues. 

 

I hope this explains things a bit.

 

Ryan Mendell

 

 

 

 

 



On Dec 21, 2019, at 1:25 AM, Tom Madden via Groups.Io <pullmanboss@...> wrote:

 

Fine detail is a jet printing process. I believe the jet printers Shapeways is using are 600 x 600 DPI X & Y, and at 16 microns per layer the Z is 1600 DPI. (3D Systems has 750 x 750 DPI machines with 13 micron layer capability, and 1600 x 900 but only for 32 micron layers.) 

If these don't sound like very high resolution printers, remember that there are two jet nozzels per pixel - you can place either wax or body material at each location. 

Tom Madden

 


Re: 3D printing (Was: New early P&R steel.....)

dalemuir2@...
 

Hi Ryan,

It's great to hear from a subject matter expert that actually works in this industry . Thank you for your excellent explanation.

 

For reference, here is a quote from both Projet 3600 and Projet 5500 specs:

Accuracy (typical) ±0.001-0.002 inch per inch (0.025-0.05 mm per 25.4 mm) of part dimension. Accuracy may vary depending on build parameters, part geometry and size, part orientation, and post-processing.

End quote

That means accuracy should be within approximately 0.1% to 0.2%

For reference, Shapeways specification for Fine Detail Plastic is way looser: ±0.3- 0.7 mm for every 100 mm

 

Would you please answer these questions?

 

1.       Is part orientation a factor in process control?

2.       I've had multiple copies of the same 205mm long model made in Smoothest Fine Detail Plastic vary in length -0.5mm to about -1.0mm, even from the same order. Yet, about 60% of the same part are the correct length. I've been stonewalled by Shapeways' Quality Control person , saying that the lengths are within specification. So the question to you is "Are these dimensional inconsistencies a limitation of the machine, or could Shapeways do something better?"

3.       If I interpret the specs correctly, my 205mm long part should be within ±0.2mm to ±0.4mm of 205mm, or between 204.6mm and 205.4mm. A difference of 0.8mm would mean the parts might not fit another printed part or a part from another source. 0.8mm is almost 3 inches in HO scale. My question then is "How can such 3D parts be used to create masters or molds?" "How can 3D printed parts be used for low volume parts instead of injection molded parts?"

4.       Finally, as you probably know, Formlabs is coming out with the Form 3L late next year. I didn't see any specification on accuracy for the Form3 on their web site. In your opinion, would a  Low Force Stereolithography (LFS) machine like the Form3 give more accuracy?

 

Thank you for taking the time to answer these questions. My hope was to be able to create low volume kits for items I need and share these with others. However, I can't do that with large parts due to the accuracy limitations with large parts, such as a passenger car or bridge girder.

 

Dale Muir

Geneva, IL

 

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Ryan Mendell
Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2019 12:26 PM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] 3D printing (Was: New early P&R steel.....)

 

I would like to offer to shed some light on the Jet printing Process, as it seams there is a genuine interest by this group to further understand the process.  At work I manage and run both a 3D Systems Projet 3600 and Projet 5500 printers.  These are what are know as ‘Polyjet' or ‘Multijet' 3d printers and is what Shapeways uses for their Fine Detail processes.  The 3600 has a build area of about 8" x 12” inches and the 5500 16” x 20”. 

 

The print head on these printers has two rows of jets, one for the model or body material as Tom called it and another for the wax or support material.  The print head on the Projet 5500 has 2400 jets across a width of 8”.  This works out to 300DPI.  To achieve higher resolution the print head shifts sideways by a pixel width and makes two passes for each layer to achieve 600DPI.  For 750DPI it makes three passes for each layer and shifts both left and right of the first pass by 0.66 of a pixel width.  I may have the math wrong for 750 DPI but I hope you get the idea.

 

After each layer is deposited at what ever DPI selected, the head has a spinning roller that pushes or forces the deposited resin down into the previous layer.  Behind the roller is a knife blade that slices the resin layer to the choose layer thickness. The final step is the head has a UV light that turns on and cures the layer.  The 5500 head is only half the width of the build plate and must make a shift half the build plate width to print the entire 16” width.  The 3600 print head is the full width of the build plate.  

 

Part print orientation is critical to get better printed parts. The head moves in the x axis.  Thus if you want to orient your part along or across the print direction you need to pick which side of your part aligns with the X axis in your CAD file.  I always design models as flat kits with the show side facing up on the build plate so no wax is used to support the critical faces of the part.  

 

To answer an earlier question as to the rigidity of these machines.  They are built like machine tools.  They have heavy frames, use servo motors(not stepper motors) and linear guide way bearings just like the CNC mills we have at work also.  The Projet 5500 weighs in at 3000lbs. 

 

As far as process control.  There really isn’t any.  You load the part into the software, Orient it the way you want and press the print button.  The only human involvement is the support removal.  The wax is melted off in an oven, and then the last of it is removed in an ultrasonic cleaner.  The big issue is warpage caused when the part is in the oven.  I no longer remove wax for model parts in the oven.  I remove it with a hobby knife and a dissolve the last of it with alcohol.  Thus avoiding warpage.  Unfortunately Shapways doesn’t offer manual removal of support material.  If your part is not symmetrical, or has thin sections and thick sections there is a good chance it will warp in the support removal oven.  You end up with bent parts or dimensional issues. 

 

I hope this explains things a bit.

 

Ryan Mendell

 

 

 

 

 



On Dec 21, 2019, at 1:25 AM, Tom Madden via Groups.Io <pullmanboss@...> wrote:

 

Fine detail is a jet printing process. I believe the jet printers Shapeways is using are 600 x 600 DPI X & Y, and at 16 microns per layer the Z is 1600 DPI. (3D Systems has 750 x 750 DPI machines with 13 micron layer capability, and 1600 x 900 but only for 32 micron layers.) 

If these don't sound like very high resolution printers, remember that there are two jet nozzels per pixel - you can place either wax or body material at each location. 

Tom Madden

 


Re: ATSF Bx-48 running board

charles slater
 

The Santa Fe Folio sheet for the Bx-48 does not list the type of running board used except it says it is steel. However on large orders for cars, 750 in the Bx-48 class, it is not unusual for Santa Fe to use several different types, just depends what was available at the time. Now in my photo collection I have photos of cars; 274199, 274312, 274625 and 274714 in original paint and lettering and all of them have Morton roof walks.
Charles Slater SFMM

Sent from Outlook



From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2019 12:22 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>; Ed Hawkins <HAWK0621@...>
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] ATSF Bx-48 running board
 
Ed

Bx-48
ATSF 274714, at least, appears to have had a MORTON running board and brake step.

The photo date is 1977, but the car is almost certainly original.

Tim



On 12/22/2019 2:21 PM, Ed Hawkins wrote:



On Dec 17, 2019, at 6:24 PM, Lester Breuer <frograbbit602@...> wrote:

Hello Ed,

I have a question on ATSF Bx -48 on the running board.  In your spreadsheet on Steam Era Freight Cars you state the ATSF Bx-48 has U.S. Gypsum (expanded metal) and Pierre in his kit 105.1 states Apex Tri-Lok.  Do you know if Pierre’s choice is correct correct? 

I appreciate your comments.  Thank You.

Happy Holidays,
Lester Breuer

STMFC,
I have corresponded off-list with Lester about this question. For the STMFC discussion group I offer the following information.

For the ATSF Bx-48 box cars 274000-274749, my STMFC roster with file name "Postwar AAR 4-4 IDN & NSC (1945-1950s).pdf" that states G1 (U.S. Gypsum of the expanded metal design) is incorrect. My apology for the error, and I have made a correction to my list to denote M* for Morton running boards/brake step. The asterisk indicates the possibility than one or more other types may have been used on the order of 750 cars. 

 For anyone who has downloaded the file, please annotate your copy accordingly.

The ATSF box car diagrams denote many specialties but do not specify the running boards/brake steps for the Bx-48 cars. I also lack having ATSF or Pullman-Standard documentation for these lot 5832 cars that specifies the type(s) of running boards/brake steps applied to the entire series. For a long time, my only photo from the Bx-48 class was a side view of 274332. From this photo I originally identified the running boards/brake step as U.S. Gypsum, but a closer look shows Morton.

The only other Bx-48 photo I’ve seen is the Pullman-Standard builder photo of 274199 published on p. 345 of the 1949-1951 Car Builders’ Cyclopedia. The print quality makes it difficult to discern that the car had a Morton running board & brake step. Patrick C. Wider published the same photo obtained from the Library and Archives Canada on p. 207 of RP CYC Volume 31-32. 

If members of the STMFC have other photos of ATSF Bx-48 box cars with a clear view of the running boards/brake step, please share in order to help determine if Morton was the only type used.

Regards,
Ed Hawkins


Re: Photo: Wabash Gondola 13000

Tim O'Connor
 


Thank you Gary


On 12/23/2019 9:21 AM, Gary Roe wrote:
Tim,

The painting diagram shows they were No. 10 Red.

gary roe
quincy, illinois




On Sunday, December 22, 2019, 2:15:16 PM CST, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:



Were these cars painted black, or oxide red, when they were new?

Tim O'Connor


On 12/22/2019 12:25 PM, Bob Chaparro via Groups.Io wrote:

Photo: Wabash Gondola 13000

From the Decatur, IL, Herald & Review archives:

https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/herald-review.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/8/fd/8fd30101-1d09-50bb-bfcc-22400f6f6da3/578e9b1837e00.image.jpg?resize=1200%2C957

Caption: H&R file photo 5-16-1944 Local Wabash car shops have just completed the first of 250 new composite gondola cars and will be busy until after July 1 turning out this order at the rate of about four cars a day. The shops have built about all other types of cars but this is the first composite gondola for them.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA



--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts

--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts


Re: Photo: Wabash Gondola 13000

Gary Roe
 

Tim,

The painting diagram shows they were No. 10 Red.

gary roe
quincy, illinois




On Sunday, December 22, 2019, 2:15:16 PM CST, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:



Were these cars painted black, or oxide red, when they were new?

Tim O'Connor


On 12/22/2019 12:25 PM, Bob Chaparro via Groups.Io wrote:

Photo: Wabash Gondola 13000

From the Decatur, IL, Herald & Review archives:

https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/herald-review.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/8/fd/8fd30101-1d09-50bb-bfcc-22400f6f6da3/578e9b1837e00.image.jpg?resize=1200%2C957

Caption: H&R file photo 5-16-1944 Local Wabash car shops have just completed the first of 250 new composite gondola cars and will be busy until after July 1 turning out this order at the rate of about four cars a day. The shops have built about all other types of cars but this is the first composite gondola for them.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA



--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts


Re: 3D printing (Was: New early P&R steel.....)

Dennis Storzek
 

On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 09:24 AM, Bill Welch wrote:
Based on the used price alone, can only assume it will be awhile before we will see one for home use to turn out quality parts. Plus depending on where we live we might have to pay to fly in the techincian Ryan mentions plus the $2K for the routine maintenance. We can dream however.
Bill, it depends what you want to do. While the Prohet machines seem to be the only ones that have a large enough build area to do complete HO scale passenger car sides and roofs, the SLA machines, such as the Form 2 that Corey used for the UCR gons are considerably cheaper, and seem to do decent work, as attested to by Corey's pictures.

And intriguingly, there is the little Anycube Photon, at 1/10 the price of the Form 2 machines. Also a photo cured resin system, but not SLA because it uses an array of UV emitters rather than a scanning laser to cure the resin, it actually claims thinner layer resolution than the Form 2 which would help with curved and angular surfaces. Not a big build area, but could be very useful for doors and ends. Typical of the hobby grade machines, the web site is very lean on technical specifications, but this review has what I was looking for: anycubic-photon-review

Of course it remains to be seen if such a lightly built machine can keep the layers aligned, but we'll never know unless someone tries one for our type of parts. If I wasn't still working, I'd give one a try.

Dennis Storzek


Re: Youngstown Door Nomenclature

Randy Hammill
 

One more thought. Another reason why I think it makes sense to think in terms of the joint not being a corrugation that is counted, is to think of the panels independently. That is, the top panel of a door, whether the joint is raised or flat, has x number of corrugations. Until it is actually attached to another panel, the bottom raised portion of the panel wouldn't be a corrugation, it would just be the bottom frame of the panel. 

In other words, if you were constructing a door, and the current panels had a raised joint, you'd select two 5 corrugation panels and one 4 corrugation panel for door #3. If that makes sense.

Randy
--

Randy Hammill
Modeling the New Haven Railroad 1946-1954
http://newbritainstation.com


Re: Youngstown Door Nomenclature

Randy Hammill
 

Looking at the pictures, I don't understand how you're counting things. For example, I would count first two pictures as 5/7/5 and the third as either 5/5/4 or 6/6/4, depending on whether you count the raised portion where the sheets join as a corrugation, but I wouldn't count the bottom, because you haven't counted the top or the bottom (the frame) on any of the doors. Personally, I think the corrugations should be counted independently of the frame and the location of the panel connections, whether that is on the "flat" or raised in a manner that resembles a corrugation. In other words, the door frame and the joint forms the frame around the corrugations that are actually counted. 

Why? Well, identifying whether the joint is raised or not clarifies things better than counting the joints only when raised. For example, in picture 2 I count 5/7/5. In picture 3 I count 5/5/4 with raised joints. This maintains consistency because we are then counting corrugations between the frame and joint. Otherwise do you count the raised joining panel as part of the group of corrugations above it, or below it? It could be a 6/6/4, or a 5/6/5. But it's not the same as a 5/6/5 door with flat joints.

Also, I've seen the word "interim" used for things like this (and the "interim" Improved Dreadnaught End). I'm not a fan of this nomenclature. For the Improved Dreadnaught End it's just plain wrong, that was a trademarked name and no "interim" applies. To me, "interim" implies a temporary thing while the proper thing is prepared or ready (such as an interim manager, while the company goes through the process of hiring a permanent one). But in the case of freight car doors and ends, they were always modifying and improving their products. So each one would either be "interim" or none.

We certainly need to describe the differences between the doors since there are so many variations, and in many cases they probably carried the same trade name (although I haven't looked extensively at ads yet to see what, if any, different terminology they used. Where possible, I would think that the year of introduction would be the best identifier.

My thoughts anyway. I appreciate the effort and would love to see how this evolves with input from the group. Thanks.

Randy
--

Randy Hammill
Modeling the New Haven Railroad 1946-1954
http://newbritainstation.com


Re: 3D printing (Was: New early P&R steel.....)

steve_wintner
 

Thank you! That explains what happened to some parts I ordered - I didn't understand the surface striations I got. Not big but visible. Now I do. Well... May need to try again.

Steve


Re: 3D printing (Was: New early P&R steel.....)

bigfourroad
 

Thanks for the pix of the actual prints. So infrequently see the real results. Agree that in HO the striations (stepping) are not objectionable. As you move up to S scale, I am tempted to think from your very helpful pix that one could live with them or use some of Ryan's National Scale Car sanders to get at them.  You play the cards you are dealt or go without as they say.
Chris Rooney


Re: 3D printing (Was: New early P&R steel.....)

Bill Welch
 

No worries, see you at THE Beach Ryan.

Bill Welch


Re: 3D printing (Was: New early P&R steel.....)

Ryan Mendell
 

I will take a video but I am off work for two weeks so it will have to wait


On Dec 22, 2019, at 12:24 PM, Bill Welch <fgexbill@...> wrote:

Here is a used 3D Systems Projet 3600. https://www.ebay.com/i/264277258999?chn=ps&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-117182-37290-0&mkcid=2&itemid=264277258999&targetid=593772166493&device=c&mktype=pla&googleloc=9012145&poi=&campaignid=2086169716&mkgroupid=76147899766&rlsatarget=aud-412677883135:pla-593772166493&abcId=1141016&merchantid=6296724&gclid=EAIaIQobChMImd65nN_J5gIVTvDACh3RMgOnEAQYASABEgIM5_D_BwE

Based on the used price alone, can only assume it will be awhile before we will see one for home use to turn out quality parts. Plus depending on where we live we might have to pay to fly in the techincian Ryan mentions plus the $2K for the routine maintenance. We can dream however.

Wondering if there is any video showing the 3D Systems Projet 3600 or Projet 5500 printer in action?

Thank you Ryan for taking time to explain the complexities.

Bill Welch


Re: ATSF Bx-48 running board

Tim O'Connor
 

Ed

Bx-48
ATSF 274714, at least, appears to have had a MORTON running board and brake step.

The photo date is 1977, but the car is almost certainly original.

Tim



On 12/22/2019 2:21 PM, Ed Hawkins wrote:


On Dec 17, 2019, at 6:24 PM, Lester Breuer <frograbbit602@...> wrote:

Hello Ed,

I have a question on ATSF Bx -48 on the running board.  In your spreadsheet on Steam Era Freight Cars you state the ATSF Bx-48 has U.S. Gypsum (expanded metal) and Pierre in his kit 105.1 states Apex Tri-Lok.  Do you know if Pierre’s choice is correct correct? 

I appreciate your comments.  Thank You.

Happy Holidays,
Lester Breuer

STMFC,
I have corresponded off-list with Lester about this question. For the STMFC discussion group I offer the following information.

For the ATSF Bx-48 box cars 274000-274749, my STMFC roster with file name "Postwar AAR 4-4 IDN & NSC (1945-1950s).pdf" that states G1 (U.S. Gypsum of the expanded metal design) is incorrect. My apology for the error, and I have made a correction to my list to denote M* for Morton running boards/brake step. The asterisk indicates the possibility than one or more other types may have been used on the order of 750 cars. 

 For anyone who has downloaded the file, please annotate your copy accordingly.

The ATSF box car diagrams denote many specialties but do not specify the running boards/brake steps for the Bx-48 cars. I also lack having ATSF or Pullman-Standard documentation for these lot 5832 cars that specifies the type(s) of running boards/brake steps applied to the entire series. For a long time, my only photo from the Bx-48 class was a side view of 274332. From this photo I originally identified the running boards/brake step as U.S. Gypsum, but a closer look shows Morton.

The only other Bx-48 photo I’ve seen is the Pullman-Standard builder photo of 274199 published on p. 345 of the 1949-1951 Car Builders’ Cyclopedia. The print quality makes it difficult to discern that the car had a Morton running board & brake step. Patrick C. Wider published the same photo obtained from the Library and Archives Canada on p. 207 of RP CYC Volume 31-32. 

If members of the STMFC have other photos of ATSF Bx-48 box cars with a clear view of the running boards/brake step, please share in order to help determine if Morton was the only type used.

Regards,
Ed Hawkins
_._,_._,_

--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts


Re: Photo: Wabash Gondola 13000

Tim O'Connor
 


Were these cars painted black, or oxide red, when they were new?

Tim O'Connor


On 12/22/2019 12:25 PM, Bob Chaparro via Groups.Io wrote:

Photo: Wabash Gondola 13000

From the Decatur, IL, Herald & Review archives:

https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/herald-review.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/8/fd/8fd30101-1d09-50bb-bfcc-22400f6f6da3/578e9b1837e00.image.jpg?resize=1200%2C957

Caption: H&R file photo 5-16-1944 Local Wabash car shops have just completed the first of 250 new composite gondola cars and will be busy until after July 1 turning out this order at the rate of about four cars a day. The shops have built about all other types of cars but this is the first composite gondola for them.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA



--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts


Re: ATSF Bx-48 running board

Ed Hawkins
 



On Dec 17, 2019, at 6:24 PM, Lester Breuer <frograbbit602@...> wrote:

Hello Ed,

I have a question on ATSF Bx -48 on the running board.  In your spreadsheet on Steam Era Freight Cars you state the ATSF Bx-48 has U.S. Gypsum (expanded metal) and Pierre in his kit 105.1 states Apex Tri-Lok.  Do you know if Pierre’s choice is correct correct? 

I appreciate your comments.  Thank You.

Happy Holidays,
Lester Breuer

STMFC,
I have corresponded off-list with Lester about this question. For the STMFC discussion group I offer the following information.

For the ATSF Bx-48 box cars 274000-274749, my STMFC roster with file name "Postwar AAR 4-4 IDN & NSC (1945-1950s).pdf" that states G1 (U.S. Gypsum of the expanded metal design) is incorrect. My apology for the error, and I have made a correction to my list to denote M* for Morton running boards/brake step. The asterisk indicates the possibility than one or more other types may have been used on the order of 750 cars. 

 For anyone who has downloaded the file, please annotate your copy accordingly.

The ATSF box car diagrams denote many specialties but do not specify the running boards/brake steps for the Bx-48 cars. I also lack having ATSF or Pullman-Standard documentation for these lot 5832 cars that specifies the type(s) of running boards/brake steps applied to the entire series. For a long time, my only photo from the Bx-48 class was a side view of 274332. From this photo I originally identified the running boards/brake step as U.S. Gypsum, but a closer look shows Morton.

The only other Bx-48 photo I’ve seen is the Pullman-Standard builder photo of 274199 published on p. 345 of the 1949-1951 Car Builders’ Cyclopedia. The print quality makes it difficult to discern that the car had a Morton running board & brake step. Patrick C. Wider published the same photo obtained from the Library and Archives Canada on p. 207 of RP CYC Volume 31-32. 

If members of the STMFC have other photos of ATSF Bx-48 box cars with a clear view of the running boards/brake step, please share in order to help determine if Morton was the only type used.

Regards,
Ed Hawkins


Re: Photo: ACL 17859

radiodial868
 

Southern-grown watermelons.  Real thick rind (made great watermelon pickles) deep red juicy flesh with lots of black seeds. Weighed a ton, but shipped and stored well. Fell out of favor in the early 1970's because of that weight, thick rind and seeds.  So, we now get those bland, tasteless, smaller and sometimes seedless things in the stores.
RJ Dial
(ex USDA guy)


Re: Photo: NJI&I Boxcar 4100

Tony Thompson
 

Garth Groff wrote:

Did anyone else notice that the photo of NJI&I is a very crude fake? Blow it up and you will see that the rivets appear to have been added through retouching and the trucks look like they were drawn by hand. It appears that the lettering was added onto a photo of another car. Even the panels are not of uniform width, though this did happen. Perhaps this photo is a mock-up done before the cars were actually built and lettered.

      Sometimes when a photo like this, of the shady side of a car, doesn't have all the detail you wished it did, the lab would "improve" it for you. Both the trucks and the rivet rows clearly look enhanced. I noticed that the reporting mark stripes are not correctly aligned with the vanishing-point angle. All that lettering on the right of the car side, in fact, is probably not in the original negative.

Tony Thompson




Re: Photo: NJI&I Boxcar 4100

Garth Groff and Sally Sanford
 

Friends,

Did anyone else notice that the photo of NJI&I is a very crude fake? Blow it up and you will see that the rivets appear to have been added through retouching and the trucks look like they were drawn by hand. It appears that the lettering was added onto a photo of another car. Even the panels are not of uniform width, though this did happen. Perhaps this photo is a mock-up done before the cars were actually built and lettered.

NJI&I indeed did have a series of boxcar that match this number, 4100-4149. 

Yours Aye,

Mungo Napier, Laird of Mallard Lodge  🦆


On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 12:25 PM Bob Chaparro via Groups.Io <chiefbobbb=verizon.net@groups.io> wrote:

Photo: NJI&I Boxcar 4100

From the Decatur, IL, Herald & Review archives:

https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/herald-review.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/8/f7/8f7680d3-54b4-57ad-939d-3a8c99db526b/578e9b15500aa.image.jpg?resize=750%2C583

Caption: H&R file photo 2-3-1944 First new all-steel cars to be turned out at the Wabash car shops since relaxation of steel priorities for railroad work is a boxcar for the N.J.I. and I., a Wabash-controlled branch line in Northern Indiana.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA


Re: Photo: ACL 17859

Donald B. Valentine
 

   I wondered about pumpkins as well, Doug, but these have too much length for any pumpkin
variety I've ever seen even some grown hereabouts that have gone well over 1,000 pounds. Some
have been carved into Cindarella's coach for display at fairs.

My best, Don Valentine


Re: Bridge girder on three PRR FM flat cars

Donald B. Valentine
 

Proving once again that the DL&W LOVED concrete! I don't know if I've ever seen another road that used
so much concrete for everything from culverts to major viaducts. Most seem to have withstood the test of
time quite well. Are there any any that have failed that I am unaware of?

Cordially, Don Valentine